Comments on: On (dis)respect, cannibalism, and Luis Suarezhttp://backpagefootball.com/on-disrespect-and-cannibalism-and-luis-suarez/57067/
Hosting diverse, award-winning original football writing since 2009.Thu, 01 Feb 2018 20:59:52 +0000hourly1https://wordpress.org/?v=4.9.4By: Mikehttp://backpagefootball.com/on-disrespect-and-cannibalism-and-luis-suarez/57067/#comment-469454
Tue, 23 Apr 2013 01:29:38 +0000http://backpagefootball.com/?p=57067#comment-469454By your logic, Suarez morally cannot play for Liverpool anymore. So who can he play for? If you believe his acts are worthy of being sacked (or sold) by Liverpool, then why is it perfectly fine for another club to buy him and play him?

I would like to point out that I am in no way condoning biting, it is disgusting and quite frankly bizarre and unusual – perhaps why there is such uproar – but it is not the worst thing we see on a football pitch, and it is not an act that has the most potential, or intent, to cause serious harm.

I do think that people are going overboard. For instance, you point out that “how could he bite a fellow human being?”. Well, how could anyone deliberately punch another human being? How could anyone deliberate stamp another human being? Or elbow them in the face? Or kick them? Or launch into a potentially leg-breaking tackle? Or headbutt them?

If anything, those attempts to injure a player have far more potential to do worse damage than biting someone on the arm. If I had to choose to receive any of the above, I would take a bite on the arm any day of the week – it is arguable that there is far more intent in the above instances as well, as there most likely was in Sergio Aguero’s two-footed lunge on David Luiz last week.

So why is biting the most heinous thing we’ve apparently seen? Is it because it isn’t a “macho” way of dealing with things and is rather more “animalistic”? It seems to be a cultural thing, like how spitting in the general direction of an opponent will give you a longer suspension than a leg-breaker. Think about it, does that really make sense?

Ryan Shawcross and Goran Popov received the same suspensions. One broke Aaron Ramsey’s leg and almost ended his career, the other spat in the general direction of Kyle Walker. Sounds reasonable?

Jermaine Defoe bit Javier Mascherano and it was laughed off by his manager – he wasn’t sacked, he even avoided a ban altogether as he received a yellow card for it. The media coverage was incredibly different though. I wonder why?

The most logical course of action, although one that I doubt the FA will implement, is that he receives a 3 or 4 match ban, obviously because it is unacceptable behaviour, and offered anger management or counselling. If it was drink or drug related (and he was English) people would be crying out he needs help. He clearly has anger/frustration issues that he needs to be helped with; much like Wayne Rooney and Joey Barton; society and the football community should be looking to help him, while he serves his penalty, rather than casting him away.

There are far worse things that happen on the football pitch, and off the pitch players do far worse as well. Your Steven Gerrard example is an interesting one as he put a DJ in hospital in a bar fight. Players hit their girlfriends or wives. Some drink-drive, which has the potential to kill. There are affairs, abortions with brothers’ wives, gagging orders, and some players even shoot youth with air rifles at the training ground!

Suarez will get his suspension, receive a fine, hopefully undergo some therapy and he’ll be back playing for Liverpool eventually. The fact that he has received harsher criticism for biting an opponent on the arm than players who set out and attempt to seriously injure opponents is the issue that people really should be thinking about.

It is wrong, it is unacceptable, it is weird but it is also kind of funny.

The best analysis on the issue has come from an ex-Liverpool player and an ex-United player. I suggest everyone look up both John Barnes’ and Gary Neville’s takes on it.